Glenn Simpson, co-founder of Fusion GPS, is taking the 5th and will not testify to his or his firm’s role in the compilation of the discredited Trump-Russia “Dossier.”

Meanwhile, Paul Manafort and Donald Trump, Jr. have agreed to a closed Q&A with the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Jared Kushner will testify in a closed session before the Senate Intelligence Committee.

FusionGPS, the creators of the dossier used by Obama gang to justify spying on @RealDonaldTrump, is now taking the Fifth.

The co-founder of the firm that authored the infamous “Russian dossier” on President Trump will not testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee next week.

Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson and his attorneys said Simpson was traveling and wouldn’t be available. But they also appeared to vent some frustration at the committee when they wrote that Simpson was “profoundly disturbed” that the hearings were becoming functions of “partisan agendas” in his opinion, Reuters reported.

The unsubstantiated dossier, sometimes referred to as the “Steele Dossier,” has been a contentious item with a long, strange history in the ongoing investigations into Russian meddling in the 2016 elections.

According to Fox News, both Senators Grassley (R-IA) and Feinstein (D-CA) have confirmed that Simpson will take the 5th.

Glenn Simpson, whose Fusion GPS firm has been tied to anti-Trump efforts and pro-Russian lobbying, will not talk to lawmakers in response to a subpoena, the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committe said Friday.

Committee chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and ranking member Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., confirmed in a statement that they subpoenaed Simpson to appear before the committee Wednesday as part of a hearing about the influence of foreign lobbying in last year’s presidential election.

“Simpson’s attorney has asserted that his client will invoke his Fifth Amendment rights in response to the subpoena,” Grassley and Feinstein said.

If Glenn Simpson's emails get subpoenaed, we'll see just how many top journalists he was feeding his garbage to. https://t.co/JHk5RDFAtn

A U.S. Senate panel has agreed to let President Trump’s eldest son and his former campaign manager testify behind closed doors next week in connection with its probe into possible Trump administration ties to Russia.

I see what you are saying, but showing up and taking the 5th is not failure to appear, contempt, and etc. Every American has the right to invoke their 5th Amendment right to remain silent, so what he is doing is not in violation (as long as he’s not making statements now, which would muddy the waters). You cannot, under our Constitution, be forced to provide testimony that incriminates you in a crime. This has to apply to icky, slimy, hated people, or it can’t apply to all of us.

One of my favorite discussions to have with students centers on this very issue: if the worst human being on God’s green earth was caught on video kicking puppies, abusing children, raping women, and drawing and quartering men, should we waive his Constitutional rights to ensure justice is done?

One’s answer to that question is meaningful. If yes, we move toward lawlessness, tyranny, and widespread persecution and oppression. If no, then we give one horrendous, evil person his day in court, but we protect the rights of every other American.

“You cannot, under our Constitution, be forced to provide testimony that incriminates you in a crime.”

You were right the first time, Fuzzy, when you said we have a “right to remain silent.” We have that right because, even if innocent, we can’t know how any information we give may be used to incriminate us in a crime, even when we may think it exculpatory. So we can’t be forced to provide any testimony, and not merely testimony that we think may incriminate us.

This is not accurate. If it was, then no one would ever be convicted of obstruction of justice for refusing to testify in a criminal matter.

While case law has veered off into the dense underbrush on this subject, it still requires a person to make a reasonable case that presenting testimony would likely result in a person incriminating himself of a crime. So, in order for a this man to be allowed to claim 5th Amendment protects from self incrimination, he has to be the target or subject of a criminal investigation or be able to make a reasonable claim that some of his activities MIGHT constitute a criminal violation. Otherwise he is in contempt of court or Congress.

“You cannot, under our Constitution, be forced to provide testimony that incriminates you in a crime.” (as above)

I was of the understanding that you *can* be forced to provide testimony *if* you are given a grant of immunity for same.

As an example, Susan McDougal refusing to answer the Grand Jury’s question about Bill Clinton lying during the Whitewater trial (for which she was pardoned by Bill Clinton, by amazing coincidence) She had been given immunity, but still refused to testify, which landed her in jail on contempt of court charges.